The paradox of choice

It is intuitive to believe that more choice is better than less. More competition leads to lower prices. More options mean more tastes are catered for. More information leads to better decision-making.

But as anyone who has recently scrolled through a streaming service catalogue has probably realised, more choice can make it harder to make decisions.

The paradox of choice

With more choice, the cognitive load of the decision increases. We can experience 'choice overload' which can prevent us making any choice at all. This is exacerbated for 'maximisers' - people who focus on making the optimal choice whenever they make a decision (I am firmly in this camp).

Attempting to make the optimal choice in the face of abundant options can have costs; in particular the opportunity cost of the extra time involved. The larger the number of choices the higher these costs are likely to be.

Additionally, we can feel unsatisfied as we deal with the possibility of future regret from not having made the best choice.

This certainly doesn't sound optimal.

Satisficing

'Satisficing' may be a helpful approach. Satisficing is about making the choice you are happy with. Whilst you may not have the optimal solution, you select one which is good enough.

It may seem counterintuitive in a newsletter about improving decision-making that being content with potentially less-than-optimal choices is suggested. However, the costs of searching for that optimal choice can outweigh the possible additional benefits, which can be marginal versus the satisficing option.

Implementation idea

The use of rules can be very helpful. Let's return to choosing a show to watch.

Capping the amount of time spent deliberating.

'I will browse until the oven beeps, and when it does I'll go with the most interesting show I found.'

Setting a threshold for selection.

'I will choose the first show which is 1) crime genre, 2) has 90%+ recommended score, 3) multiple seasons long.'

Whilst a trivial example where the net result may be saved minutes to be better spent watching and enjoying a show, the same principle applies to higher value decisions, say selecting a candidate for a role or buying a house. The additional time and resource from making the optimal choice can have costs such as missing out on the preferred option from taking too long deliberating.

The use of rules to reach a satisfactory choice can lead to improved overall outcomes.

Best, Alex Joshi.